impeach bush for peace peach
(Go to our Main Page:ImpeachForPeace.org)

Add to Google

Daily Impeachment News:

May 4, 2009

Condie Rice gets another grilling on torture – from a 4th grader

Filed under: Related to Impeachment — Mikael @ 1:25 pm

Guardian.uk
Will Condoleezza rice be dogged for the rest of her life by questions about her role in the Bush administration’s harsh interrogation policies?
Last week, Rice was confronted by a student at Stanford University student who asked her if the near-drowning technique known as waterboarding is torture.
Yesterday, Rice was forced on the defensive by a Bethesda, Maryland, grade-schooler.
According to the Washington Post, Misha Lerner, a fourth grader at the Jewish Primary Day School of the Nation’s Capital asked Rice to comment on President Obama’s rejection of Bush-era interrogation methods.
On her first public appearance in Washington since Obama’s inauguration, Rice was giving a talk for about dozen school children.
She replied:

Let me just say that President Bush was very clear that he wanted to do everything he could to protect the country. After September 11, we wanted to protect the country. But he was also very clear that we would do nothing, nothing, that was against the law or against our obligations internationally. So the president was only willing to authorize policies that were legal in order to protect the country.

Last week, she told the Stanford student, in an exchange caught on video and widely viewed on youtube, that none of the “enhanced interrogation techniques” used under the Bush administration were illegal, because Bush had approved them. “By definition, if it was authorised by the president, it did not violate our obligations under the Convention Against Torture,” she said.Source


5 Comments

  1. A fourth grader? That’s beautiful.

    Comment by Kaelieh — May 5, 2009 @ 10:16 am

  2. Condi Rice is such a lier!!!

    Comment by Ramblnrose — May 20, 2009 @ 7:55 am

  3. […] Impeach For Peace Condie Rice gets another grilling on torture Posted by root 23 hours ago (http://impeachforpeace.org) That beautiful comment by kaelieh may 5 2009 10 16 am quot war is peace quot big brother in george orwell 1984 powered by wordpress Discuss  |  Bury |  News | impeach for peace condie rice gets another grilling on torture […]

    Pingback by Impeach For Peace Condie Rice gets another grilling on torture | Cast Iron Cookware — May 26, 2009 @ 6:20 pm

  4. I was not aware the president had the power to change international definition of torture.It was torture,and illegal up to the 9/11 attack.What gave him the power of such a move?HE was our president.He was NOT our commander in chief of the civilian population.He was commander in chief of the military only.For him to think other wise made him delusional,and his cabinet LIARS,and WAR CRIMINALS!Colin Powell was the only person associated with his administration that had any MORAL fiber.He resigned.

    Comment by Jim Lee — May 29, 2009 @ 5:35 pm

  5. In doing research for briefs to the US SUpreme Court (08-6585,
    08-8712, re immigration and family issues)I combed through the Statutes at Large and could not find the Convention Against Torture, the 1951 Refugee Convention or the 1967 Protocol to that Convention. How important is that fact in holding not only executive individuals but also the People (i.e Congress and others) responsible?
    Mary

    Comment by Marianne Lisenko — June 5, 2009 @ 4:55 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

"I just want you to know that,
when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace."
-Bush, June 18, 2002

"War is Peace"
-Big Brother in George Orwell's 1984

Do-It-Yourself
Impeachment
Blog Categories
Our Whole Site

As heard on
the radio...
Bush hears the voices logo
KFAI radio interview
"I Hear The Voices"
Oct 5th Ad
• Oct 5th Interview
Mike Malloy
Peter Werbe
Get Impeach For Peace Stuff!
(pins, bumper stickers, hats, etc.)
Impeach Bush for Peace Stuff logo
protest picture
Calendar

Picts/Vid
Why Should Bush Have Been Impeached?Charges against Bush

Charges & Evidence


Videos

Bush's Defense
Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...

• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
The first impeachment resolution introduced by McKinney included Bush, Cheney, and Rice. Although, even if we only initially pursue Bush, initiating the impeachment process will lead to an investigation that will implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of committing crimes, including Cheney.

No matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.

• Promoting impeachment will seem too “extreme.”
Demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme. Some previous impeachment attempts were considered extreme because they were pursued for actions that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is what the impeachment tool is meant to be used for. Nixon's impeachment, however, was bipartisan.

  • We should wait to impeach...
Wait to impeach? We've waited 3 or more years too long already. We had enough evidence to impeach years ago. Remember, an impeachment only means you have enough evidence to warrant a trial, just like an indictment. Our congress people didn't take an oath to bipartisanship. They took an oath to the Constitution. Besides which, our troops, Iraqi civilians, and our own civil liberties are all waiting for this.
 
• Before we impeach, we should get some legislation passed...
And with unconstitutional Presidential Signing Statements, veto power, and the power of "Commander in Chief" at his disposal, how do you think Congress is going to get anything accomplished without first impeaching Bush?

If your tire blows while you're driving, do you stop to fix it? Or do you continue driving on your rim because to stop would take too much time?

• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential impeachment. And Bush is a lame duck anyway.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.

Sometimes reprimanding a child (president) doesn't make the family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and his siblings (future presidents) learn about accountability. Impeachment is horribly UNDERUSED, which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top. Politicians must learn to fear it. People think things are better because we improved the make-up of our law-making body, Congress. But Bush is BREAKING LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws Congress passes if they don't serve their OVERSIGHT duties as well by impeaching. They swore to defend the Constitution. What are laws without enforcement?

Besides, considering Bush's track-record of breaking laws, he can still do a lot of damage. Our troops, Iran, and our Supreme Court are all endangered so long as he remains in office. Waiting until Bush is out of office will leave us complicit in any further crimes he commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.

Perhaps worst of all, we set a terrible precedent by allowing Bush to stay in office after he's broken so many laws. Impeachment will stop future presidents from using Bush's actions as justification for even more lawbreaking and erosion of civil liberties.

• I'm a Democrat/
Republican. If we support impeachment it will lower the chances of my party winning in 2008.

So, your party would rather win elections than do what's right for the country? I hope you're wrong. I also hope the public is willing to throw additional support to any party that holds our elected officials accountable for their actions. This has been historically true with every single impeachment effort launched. And this impeachment effort would begin with majority support (unlike most past impeachments including Nixon).

• Impeachment will never happen. Congress members will block it.
Well, all we need is a majority of support in the House. And 2/3rds vote in the Senate to remove Bush from office will happen once the evidence gets aired on the floor of the House, and subsequently the national media outlets. The political pressure will become too great.

Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. Congress members will realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by 2009— but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing them our support for impeachment.

And even if we only impeach, and the Senate fails to do their duty and remove him from office, it will only implicate the Senators who fail to do their sworn Constitutional duty.

• But Speaker of the House Pelosi said that Impeachment was "off the table."

Pelosi most likely said this to remove any appearance of conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as a result of the coming impeachment. What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment movement in the future.

(Read More)